Skip to main content

About your Search

20130101
20130131
STATION
CSPAN 7
CSPAN2 4
KPIX (CBS) 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
the e.u. to impose sanctions on hezbollah, and you have been a believer that we should not do it alone, we should do with unilateral. what we do take the chance and urged the european union to sanction has a lot? is we shouldn insurer swer not be writing lesser proof, i think the president is the appropriate official. >> and congress has no interest in whether the e.u. would be sanctioned as a terrorist or a station? >> the congress has a responsibility in a lot of things. >> that me ask you this about the iranian revolutionary guard. he said a minute ago you think they are a terrorist recession. do you agree? bailout yes. >> and you voted against the amendment designating them as a terrorist organization because they are recognized as a state? iran, you would not want to designate the army of a recognized as a terrorist? >> i just clarify a statement on iran being a recognized nation by the nine nations, by most world bodies. the reason why i did not vote as 22 other members that because i think jim webb's argument was a strong argument, and that is we have -- and this is what he said
. defended dialogue with hamas. refused to join in a letter calling on e.u. to condemn hezbollah. he had a pejorative comment to jewish lobby. he has taken stances that indicateed he is less than supportive of the relationship with israel. >> there are two key democrats that could factor in how this goes. one is new york democratic senator schumer. >> he is staying quiet on the fight. talk about the real oppositio opposition. i think there will be some tough hurdles to get over with republicans. but i don't think there is enough democratic fight to stop the nomination. out of loyalty to the president who don't want him appointed will vote for him. >> bret: john kerry, fair to say he has an easy ride? >> yeah. it's an opportunity to get questions answered on benghazi or put it front and center in how the future of the state department will be run. no, i don't think there is any problem with him. >> bret: you agree, carl? >> it's interesting hearing. i agree that the committee means he gets approved but he will be asked about benghazi and about the basic tenets. and he will go on about the
the sum total of all of your votes, refusing to sign a letter to the e.u. asking hezbollah to be designated a terrorist organization, being one of 22 to vote to guard terrorist terrorist organization, one of two to vote on sanction this body tried to make on iran and the statements you made after palestinians and about the jewish lobby, all of that together, that the image you created is one of sending the worst possible signal to enemies and friends at one of the most critical times in world history? >> i would not agree with that. if you had a chance tomorrow, today, after lunch, vote to say the iranian revolutionary guard was terrorist organization would you vote no? >> times change. it recognize that. yes, i would reconsider. >> thank you. that encouraging. >> bret: interesting exchange with lindsey graham. back with the panel. you talk about senator graham's exchange with chuck hagel. >> now that we have shown everyone how spontaneous and non-rehearsed we, are i was thinking of the tape where he quotes hagel saying the jewish lobby has intimidated senators in to voting
123450eu6789. >> schieffer: you're favoring getting out of there. >> the quicker the better. >> schieffer: should we leave a residual force there of some kind. >> bob i would think i've been there twice now as a governor and as a u.s. senator and i believe we have some strategic especially the force base. that's a tremendous opportunity strategic point for us to launch from to protect our troops for our special forces to operate out of. i would did he ever to the experts -- defer to the experts and professionals on that. we have this war on terror not just from our generation but our children's and grandchildren's. we have to be able to strike at terror before it strikes us. >> schieffer: i don't think there's any question we have denied al-qaeda a save haven in afghanistan but they now have a safe haven in pakistan. what do we do with pakistani. >> i approve of the jones strikes there. i'm one that says we should use all the technology we have to protect america and americans without putting them in harm's way. that's been very effective. we've been able to strike and tak
weeks s. 250eu78. when one side knows that with 41 votes they can absolutely trash can something, why should they compromise? if they've got the 41 votes. again, i want to emphasize another act about my proposal. republicans have stated that filibuster are necessary because democrats increasingly employ procedural mar maneuvers to pret them from offering amendments. i offered guarantee rights to offer amendments filed in advance of a cloture vote so everyone knows what's coming, the right -- the inherent right of the minority to offer those raiments. -- amendments. unfortunately, of course, every republican voted against my proposal and that is because republicans currently want the best of both worlds; the right to offer nongermane amendments and the right to obstruct. this doesn't make sense. again, no one should be fooled. the fact is that the radicals who now hold sway in the republican party are not concerned with make the government or senate function better. that's why the current use of the filibuster has nothing to do with ensuring minority rights to debate or the right to am
states at 1.4, which means for every dollar you cut, you ha you had e lose $1 340eu in gross domestic product. goildman sax, which is not exactly a left-wing outfit has put it close to 1.5. cut $1, lose $1.50 in gross domestic product. economists at the the university of california have found that during recessions -- and it is important -- during recessions, the fiscal multiplier in developed countries generally falls between 1.5 and 2. that complicated economic gobbledygook boils down to this: $1 in reduced government spending will reduce gross domestic product by more than $1 -- by $1 340eu or $1.70 or whatever the multiplier is, and damages the economy without accomplishing the intended deficit reduction. other countries teame attemptedt austerity -- spain, greece, and portugal particularly have persistent double-dynel i think unemployment -- double-digit unemployment, over 126% i 26% in and greece, and they have anemic or negative economic growth rates. contrast that with the u.s. where a more balanced approach to the economic crisis yielded an unemployment rate that is still far
. 89 senators voted for it. he voted against it. a letter to the eu asking the eu to designate hezbollah a terrorist organization. 88 senators signed it. he was one of the ones who didn't. when there was a letter to russia asking to deal with the rising tide of anti-semitism in russia. 99 senators signed the letter, one did not, chuck hagel. he has the right to have those interviews but there is a bipartisan consensus in washington illustrated by the math outside it. the question is why does the president want that in the discussion? why does he want that person with those judgments running the pentagon at this time? those are important questions to be explored during the hearing. >> he should have the opportunity to answer that. he has made clear on matters that impact israel the most in a positive way, i would not have been on the side of senator hagel in those votes, important to answer it and important to look at his entire record. on the things that matter most with u.s. policy and our great ally, israel, he has been as responsible as any when it comes to financial support
to -- ountries that aspire to ascendancy in the eu. progress there will continue american leadership. i hope we will continue to work again to the region to ensure -- in the region to ensure that they continue to make progress. >> we will, senator. thank you for your leadership of the european foreign subcommittee. i look forward to working with a. -- you. >> senator kerry, i appreciate your thoughtful opening statement in response to these questions. i have a great deal of respect for your level of experience. i would've enjoyed working with you as a member of the committee. i will enjoy working with you as secretary of state. these are complex issues, these are dangerous times. i grew up helping politics at the water's edge and was true. -- hoping that that maxim that politics ends at the water's edge was true. i believe we share the same goals. we want a secure, prosperous america. i think that starts being open and honest with each other. i hate to go back to yesterday's news and by yesterday when i was asking a relatively simple question, secretary clinton's reaction was "what difference a
that aspire to ascendancy in the eu. progress there will continue american leadership. i hope we will continue to work again to the region to ensure they continue to make progress. >> we will, senator. thank you for your leadership of the european foreign subcommittee. i look forward to working with a. >> senator kerry, i appreciate your thoughtful opening statement in response to these questions. i have a great deal of respect for your level of experience. i would've enjoyed working with you as a member of the committee. i will enjoy working with you as secretary of state. these are complex issues, these are dangerous times. i grew up helping politics at the water's edge and was true. i believe we share the same goals. we want a secure, prosperous america. i think that starts being open and honest with each other. i hate to go back to yesterday's news and by yesterday when i was asking a relatively simple question, secretary clinton's reaction was i think it makes a big difference. i think it matters a great deal at the american people get the truth. i think they have the right to be told the
kerry would be a very effect t*eu secretary of state because he could carry out president obama's foreign policy position. he sailed he wouldn't pick him as secretary of state because they have a very different philosophy, bill. bill: we'll see if she mentions some of the more fiery hot spots on the globe today, she's been traveling a million miles, isn't that what she said yesterday. >> reporter: we heard a lot about her traveling more than a million miles as secretary of state. those of who who like hillary clinton were applauding her for her service and her going all over the world and others wanted to ask tough questions about benghazi. martha: i see elizabeth war warren at the table there. is she playing a roam? we are seeing new faces in the senate. >> reporter: i think she has an introduction here. do you want to listen in. martha: sure. >> i know will continue in the tradition of john quincy adams and christian herder as great secretaries from the commonwealth of massachusetts. although john learned more about diplomacy overseas and in the senate he'll be the first to te
pleated, we still have those countries that aspear to ascend ancy into the e.u. i would just urge you that further progress in that area is going to continue to require american leadership. i hope that we will continue to work in the region to ensure that they continue to make progress. >> we will, senator. i just want to thank you for your leadership of the european affairs subcommittee you've done a tremendous job working on it and i look forward to working with you. >> senator kerry, i appreciate your thoughtful opening statement and your thoughtful response to these questions. i have a great deal of respect for your global experience, your depth of knowledge in these areas. i would have enjoyed working with you as a member of the committee and i'm going to enjoy working with you as secretary of state. as you said, these are complex issues and these are dangerous times. i certainly grew up hoping that that maxim of politics ends at the water's edge was actually true. i'm not sure it ever was but it's something to aspear to. we have the same goals, we want a prosperous and secure am
leverage the market. there has been some talks about a u.s.-eu partnership. i do not know if that can become reality. we need to think about not creating a threat where there is not one. understand carefully where we can find the basis of better cooperation. i want someone saying, kerry has a mistaken notion of what china is doing. i am not saying you do not have to be careful and understand where it is going. i am not talking about retreating from our current levels. i am trying to think about how we do this in a way that does not create the reaction you do not want to create. >> senator mccain. >> your 29 years of service is a great example for those of us newcomers. i thank you for that. in the opening round of russian --assurance, we raised issues about the western hemisphere. i worry that our firm -- our foreign policy has been very oriented east-west. the north-south access is important. i worry about the chinese being all over the americas. in a time -- we could see our influenzae road. i hope that the state department has that north-south access as they keep focus. your openin
and to the e.u., and i would just urge you that further progress in that area is going to continue to require american leadership, and i hope that we will continue to work in the region to ensure that they continue to make progress. >> we will, senator. and i just want to thank you for your leadership of the subcommittee. you've been absolutely terrific and i look forward to working with you. thanks. >> senator johnson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senator, i appreciate your thoughtful opening statement and your thoughtful response to these questions. i have a great deal of respect for your level of experience, your knowledge in these areas and i would have enjoyed working with you as a member of the committee. i'm going to enjoy working with you as the secretary of state and i mean that in all sincerity. i want to have a close working relationship. as used in your opening statement, these are complex times. you know, i sort of grew up hoping that that maximum of politics at the water's edge was actually true. i'm not sure it ever was, but i think it's something we can aspire to. i truly think
ol skr*eus tha anesthesiologist that puts people to sleep and wakes them up for a living. they say consolidation is very important and it happens while we are sleeping. what is it? >> husbands can now use this as an excuse as to why they forgot to take the trash out because they didn't get a good night sleep. whaoeufpl we are sleeping the brain is working and it's working on over time to consolidate memories. what this means is that things that we encounter during the day, conscious or subconscious they get processed in networks or frame works within the brain. they get sorted based upon some common patterns and they also get stored and downloaded, similar to when you back up your computers. it's a process that will store all the memory that you need to have. jaime: let's say you're not a good sleeper. >> absolutely. jaime: how bad a shape are you in, then? jaime: what they've been showing is that the brain basically functions on delta waives during deep sleep and normally right now when we're talking we are having alpha and beta waves which are fast low voltage waves. when you get
refused to position the e.u. to identify hezbollah as a terrorist group. third, in november of twee, you failed to -- 2003, you failed to vote on a syrian accountability act with sanctions -- occupation of lebanon. four, in 2001, you were one of only two senators that year to vote against renewal of the iran-libya sanctions act. and lastly, in 2001, you were one of four senators who refused to sign the letter supporting israel. are those accurate? >> well, let's start with the -- >> no. i just want to know if the statement -- these are votes that took place. do you agree those votes took place? >> i want to ask the letter that you just noted in your fifth point, what was the date in the letter? >> the date. >> you said i refused to sign letter. >> october of 2001. >> a letter to -- >> ok. skip that one. is the other ones true? >> well, it was fairly important -- >> it's very important. i was holding the letter at the time that we were gathering signatures. >> i see. on the 2008 question regarding designating the revolutionary guard as a terrorist organization, i did vote against it. >> i
total of all of your votes refusing to sign a letter to the eu, asking has a lot to be designated as a terrorist organization, being one of 22 to vote to designate the iranian revolutionary guard as a terrorist organization, being one of two to vote against sanctions this body was trying to impose on iran, the statements you have made about palestinians and the jewish lobby -- all of that together, that the image you have created is one of sending the worst possible signal to our enemies and friends at one of the most critical times in world history? >> no, i would not agree with that because i have taken actions and made statements very clear as to what i believe hezbollah and hamas are as terrorist organizations. >> if there was a vote on the floor of the senate this afternoon to label the iranian national -- revolutionary guard, the people that killed soldiers in iraq, some of the most vicious people to the people of iran themselves, if there was a vote would you still vote no? >> i would want to know from the president what they were doing. ask i mean you read the paper, you w
enlarging the stability in europe itself by enlarging our institution, the eu or nato. what's happened to that agenda? is a no longer a part of the democratic countries? and if the answer is was so care about -- are whether georgia can become more stable, how do we get smarter about it? it isn't obvious our institutions hold the same if you used to hold five or six years ago. it isn't obvious that comes like ukraine had to stay democratizing instinct, the country of central europe had 10 years ago. so what, if anything, would you do different to make sure part of your democratic in state? >> i'd like to say quickly, i think some countries have taken a bit of an appetite suppressant when he came to their ambitions of being part of the european union, for example. >> but they are democratic. >> but they are democratic. but there also has to be benefit that flows. i think that is very much a part of the typos as to whether people are going to pursue being part of a larger union, being part of an obsession like nato. there has to be some apparent benefit in so doing. you know, the ability
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)